| traceurling | | |
That face when Terran pushes and you have no where to flank them from
|
| NegativeZero | | |
I see a couple of places you could set up a flank, you'd just have to prepare it well in advance of the push coming (which might still be a problem, idk).
modified by NegativeZero |
| traceurling | | |
| I think the high ground in the center being buildable just makes it worse |
| NegativeZero | | |
| yes, that should definitely be changed |
| traceurling | | |
Zerg OP...
PvZ: 0-6 or something like that
|
| NegativeZero | | |
| you have tested this map? |
| traceurling | | |
| Yea Cardinal hosts his maps on iccup occasionally and i join when i dont want to ladder |
| CardinalAllin | | |
Version 0.5
-Full polish
modified by CardinalAllin |
| traceurling | | |
| I think you should put neutral buildings on the ramp at the 6 and 12 o clock facing the natural to narrow it a bit, and possibly the same for the other ramp |
| CardinalAllin | | |
All finished. Final version uploaded now.
 |
| Freakling | | |
| Small issue: Your bottom main mineral formation blocks creep spread behind the minerals. |
| CardinalAllin | | |
| Can you explain more please? |
| Freakling | | |
| ? Wasn't that clear enough? Serious qusestion. I can only try and rephrase it: There will be no creep behind the minerals in the bottom main (unless you build something that spreads it around the minerals. It's just a minor issue, but some Zerg players like to put their spire behind the mineral line. Would be more of an issue if the gap was wide enough for a pool, I guess. |
| CardinalAllin | | |
| At the top right, zerg cannot build behind the main min line either (without a creep colony). |
| Freakling | | |
Game cast on this map!:
http://www.twitch.tv/bisudagger/b/518220221 |
| CardinalAllin | | |
Ah cool.
Alternative youtube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUGvlaeUSgY
Im working on the map and have this so far:
modified by CardinalAllin |
| Freakling | | |
I don't think I like any of those changes... Opening Up the plateaus in the middle is probably a good idea to help PvT, but I think you overdid it. It's too easy to skirt the bridges now.
And those double expos really look like something from a worst idea contest... Terran will probably love them, though, but every one else not so much. |
| CrystalDrag | | |
i would keep the original one. also i would re-angle the large ramp closest to the natural in 60degrees.
If you want the double expo, then make there two bridges or something. |
| Freakling | | |
I would keep the outer wide ramps, but revert the middle to the original version, so you keep that rush path over the bridges.
I don't think this map needs any additional expansions. They were pretty nicely spaced out as they were originally. If you really want anopther expo, I'd suggest you just put a neutral, open mineral only "at the wayside" between corner and the hill expos.
Cosmetically, I would make the clockwise expos asphalt and add a road to the corner expo bridges, so you get one contiuous strip of road meandering across the map. Add more building space to the clockwise expo in the process, because having more room for cannons/colonies and being able to pylon wall there would really help. Maybe you can make it a bit more like Electric Circuit's 3rds, so you could wall it off and still keep the pathway open for your units. You'd need additional space, but with the new wide ramp to the centre plateau you could easily clip of an edge of that. |
| CardinalAllin | | |
I agree with most things, cheers.
The double expos are ofcourse pretty controversial. Im going to keep them for now though.
The double thin bridges in the centre I strongly agree need to return. Ive done that but made them smaller and the ramps around them bigger etc.
Ive also put in a bit more buildable space at the 3/9 o clocks. You can wall the entrances with 5 pylons vs vults.
 |
| CrystalDrag | | |
| different main ramps? |
| Freakling | | |
When shortening the bridges, consider the following (I already discussed this same thing with -NegativeZero- when he worked on the Overwatch update): Tank range is 12, dragoon range (with upgrade) is only 6. So when a bridge is only 6 tile long or shorter it becomes incredibly easy for terran to push across because they can just siege up some thanks on the water cliff and push across while the sieged up tanks cover the units moving across the bridges against goons coming in to snipe them.
You can often see situations like this on Tau Cross, but it does not matter that much because the map is open, the bridges are wide and it is hard for terran to expand.
But take Polaris, as example, where the bridges are very long and thin, to make them easy to defend.
modified by Freakling |
| CardinalAllin | | |
The bottom main ramp is edited yep. Its to allow building space for sunkens. Ive edited it a bit more now to fix a depot walling ishyou.
The bridges here are short on one edge but normal on the other.
I would say the gameplay here is good concerning tank vs goon scenarios; mostly because the area between the nats and the bridges is so large. Its significantly more delicate on Overwatch/Polaris.
On this map, tank vs goon exchanges around the bridges I think will be;
-balanced as in goons can stall for a balanced amount of time.
-satisfying as in the micro will be fun and fair
-forgiving as in there is a nice amount of buffer zone so that mistakes arent penalized too heavily.
Oh btw you guys might be interested in a 3 part article about the development of a CounterStrike map;
click here for part 3
Heres an excerpt that is about the dilemna between creating something you believe in or appealing to the audience. Do you guys find this a really tricky tightrope to walk?
'We had considered such a path early on in Crown’s gray-box stage, but decided not to implement the path back then because we wanted to emphasize identifying fakes and making timely call-outs about what the Terrorists were doing. As it happened, the community didn’t love the lengthened rotation times, perhaps because rotating places huge emphasis on the teamplay aspect of Counter-Strike, but truly relying on your teammates can be frustrating outside of a tournament-style setting.
I personally enjoyed the way Crown was playing, but sometimes as a mapper you have to accept that your personal preference might be in the minority. Sometimes you have to give the people what they want. Because Volcano was adamant that this was the right thing to do, because shortening rotation times was going to make the community happy, and because it would positively impact gameplay for players at all skill levels (especially in less formal settings like matchmaking), we implemented the new path.' |
| CardinalAllin | | |
16th April 2014
Version 1.1
-Added backdoor expansions in corners (the building cannot be sieged from outside but the mineral workers can be)
-Made central hills larger with wider ramps
-Remixed naturals
-More buildable space outside naturals
-More unit blocking doodads (and cabbages)
-More buildable space at 3/9
-Tweaks to walling the corner expos
The natural choke is 6 tiles but can be made wider by killing the 3 eggs. There are unbuildable tiles which prevent terran from being able to wall the choke with 1 rax 2 depot.
Protoss can wall this choke with 3 pylons though. |
| CardinalAllin | | |
 |
| Freakling | | |
If you use eggs, don't place them right on the tile, but use them to close the gap, so one can wall ling tight against it (so Protoss, for example, can wall ramp-sided at both nats).
I don't think any Zerg would ever Simcity the corener expos when there's already a bridge that you can just block with two lurker eggs.
And the more I think about it, the more I find that you should change the 3/9 o'clock expos like I suggested (like Electric Circuit 3rds). The problem is that one of the main routes for unit movement goes right through that expo, which would be blocked if one pylon-walled it off like you suggest. Besides that, 5 Pylons required per choke is not really a great wall, to begin with.
Don't go overboard with unwalkable doodads, especially big ones like thos rocks. they can get quite annoying when they're all over the main pathways. I would consider using trees instead, because they at least add some tactical value (cover effect).
What are those minerals on the cliff for? |
| CardinalAllin | | |
Thankyou very much for the tips.
Its very useful for me, much appreciated.
Those minerals on the cliff are just to fill the gap. |
| CardinalAllin | | |
The site is working again, yay!
Thanks Panschk for fixing it. You did it very quickly, Im amazed. I was expecting it to take several days at a minimum.
Today is the 12th August 2014. A few weeks ago I released new version of this map:
22nd July 2014
Version 1.3
-Reverted to single corner expansions
-Much wider low ground side paths
-High ground 3/9 o clock with single ramp
-Smaller centre hills
-Added ramp from side path to centre hills |
(2)Queensbridge
-
vs 
(1on1, 1.16)
